 |
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by splangy
bad news,
"It's simply a matter of time: the sheer amount of art we have to do for each Civ really constrains us. As I've stated numerous times before, we consciously chose quality over quantity. I'd personally rather have 16 very high-quality and distinctive Civs than 48 cookie-cutter Civs, anyway."-Dan Mahagana.
so they chose quality over quantity? great, except THEY TOOK ALOT OF CIVS AWAY FOR FLASHY GRAPHICS
but here is some good new's!
"And, with the editors, people will be able to create whatever Civs they want."
taken from the forums at- http://www.civfanatics.com/ |
Maybe we should wait for the game to be release before we get to upset. We might find out the game is a great game and also we then might realize why they did not add more Civs to the game. Of course it would have been nice to included all of the Civs from Civ 2 and maybe a few more, but we will find out soon enough. The real change I hope they made this time is that you can play every combination of Civs instead of you pick either American, China, Persia. But can not play with the America, Chinese and Persian in the same game.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
I agree that civ-specific units are silly, I much prefer having unique units, which are units that any civ can acquire once they have the prerequisites. Each civ can have only a limited number of unique unit types (either 1 or 2), and once a unique unit type is taken other Civs can't make them.
Given constrains, however, I do prefer quality over quantity. Yeah there are lots of units in CTP but how many do you really use? |
I have not hear one way or another that only one Civ can build Civ Specific Unit. I have hear that Unique Units can be built by anyone who has the correct material to build it. When Firaxis come out and said only one civ can build the Legions then I will belive it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hey dudes, just trust in Firaxis huh, I'm sure they know what they're doing. I'm sure they've been playing the game, and I'm sure they can tell if their ideas suck or not. They're not the type of company to release sucky programs like many other's do.
|
|
| |
|
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000
time: 06:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dan Mahaga
"As I've stated numerous times before, we consciously chose quality over quantity. |
This is great news!  
Compare with Test Of Time. That team choosed quantity over quality instead. Did TOT become a success?? No...
They never changed/ upgraded anything under the hood. The graphics-update was weak. They mostly added quantity-ideas, like multi-plane maps + SciFi- and fantasy-stuff, which one often couldnt relate to in a meaningful way.
quote:
I'd personally rather have 16 very high-quality and distinctive civs than 48 cookie-cutter civs, anyway. |
If "high-quality" and "distintictive" means strong, but distinctively different AI-strategies, I all for it. I much rather choose upto 6-7 strong & characteristic AI-civs from a palette of 16 possible choices, then play against 40+ lame & uniform mini-empires.
IF its really possible to play with all 16 civs on the map, I at least hope that they have implemented some good anti-BAB (bigger always better) measures, so that cities in small and perhaps more passive AI-empires is given some advantages that similar big empire cities dont have. Preferably much less happiness-problems with huge cities within small empires. This would counteract the BAB-problem somewhat.
I have also come to terms with the Civ-specific units idea, since it only adds 1-2 specials to each Civ. Big deal. I think it will be fun.
If "distinctive civs" means anything rigid, like the cardboard-cut SMAC-faction +/- benefits, I dont like it.  I have some doubths however, because the SE-system has been confirmed, NOT being a part of Civ-3.
If they nevertheless implemented something like this - it most probably can be checkbox-optional (like in AOK).
I am STILL not sure about the faction-style +/- science, trade, growth & battle-benefits to each Civ from the very beginning. Has it, or has it not been implemented?? Have you guys read anything that confirms this 100%?
quote:
"And, with the editors, people will be able to create whatever Civs they want." |
Hmm. I fear the worst about those +/- benefits attached to each Civ, from the very beginning. Still - even if its optional, it would be nice if this could be confirmed to be true, or not true - once and for all.
Last edited by Ralf on 23-06-2001 at 16:15
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I will be leaving it on, I think its a great idea
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14.
Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
23-06-2001 08:44
!
|